Azeem Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 Trump will either get impeached or assassinated before the next elections and if he doesn't than he will win the elections once again
Harry Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 28 minutes ago, Azeem said: Trump will either get impeached or assassinated before the next elections and if he doesn't than he will win the elections once again I'm not sure why trump would even run. He obviously doesn't give a fuck about politics and it does significantly increase his chances of impeachment, particularly if the Senate changes hands. I don't see the upside to justify the risk. Step aside and let Nikki Haley and Mike Pence fight over the ashes and go back to your business empire.
Cicero Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 7 hours ago, Azeem said: Trump will either get impeached or assassinated before the next elections and if he doesn't than he will win the elections once again Neither will happen.
Azeem Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 15 minutes ago, Cicero said: Neither will happen. Crystal Ball never lies !
Cicero Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Azeem said: Crystal Ball never lies ! You think he will get either assassinated or impeached?
Azeem Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Cicero said: You think he will get either assassinated or impeached? Impeached quite possible ! assassinated was tongue in cheek
Azeem Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 Lol imagine Trump getting assassinated by an illegal Mexican-Muslim immigrant That will make him the greatest martyr ever among his base
Azeem Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 7 hours ago, Harry said: I'm not sure why trump would even run. He obviously doesn't give a fuck about politics and it does significantly increase his chances of impeachment, particularly if the Senate changes hands. I don't see the upside to justify the risk. Step aside and let Nikki Haley and Mike Pence fight over the ashes and go back to your business empire. That's the weirdest thing about Trump. All other US presidents had sound knowledge of US foreign policy and agendas in international matters even if you question their some decision. Trump has no idea about anything, he came to White House straight from his business. That's why you see him saying one thing a day and than says another thing the other day regarding things outside of US. Maybe the Establishment reminds him that that's not how America does the job.
Eco Posted February 5, 2019 Posted February 5, 2019 I don't think Trump has a chance in the next election. I'm not even sure he has the backing of the Republican Party anymore. If you get people like Beto O'Rouke, who is very likable, smart, and charismatic running for the Democrats, and a guy like Ben Sasse who is all of the same as Beto but conservative...then I don't think Trump will get a chance to run as the Republican Choice for POTUS.
Harry Posted February 6, 2019 Posted February 6, 2019 6 hours ago, Eco said: I don't think Trump has a chance in the next election. I'm not even sure he has the backing of the Republican Party anymore. If you get people like Beto O'Rouke, who is very likable, smart, and charismatic running for the Democrats, and a guy like Ben Sasse who is all of the same as Beto but conservative...then I don't think Trump will get a chance to run as the Republican Choice for POTUS. It would be a big deal for trump to have a Republican challenger in the primaries but who is positioned as clearly not aligned or outspoken enough where coming out to challenge would be plausible rather than disorientating to the voting public...? Kasich clearly yes. Someone dumped by trump cabinet like James Mattis? Unless Congress really engineer a break from trump few others could be expected to do it.
Azeem Posted February 6, 2019 Posted February 6, 2019 USA USA USA USA USA USA USA LOL Is this the congress meeting or a high school football match
Dr. Gonzo Posted February 6, 2019 Posted February 6, 2019 On 05/02/2019 at 09:33, Eco said: I don't think Trump has a chance in the next election. I'm not even sure he has the backing of the Republican Party anymore. If you get people like Beto O'Rouke, who is very likable, smart, and charismatic running for the Democrats, and a guy like Ben Sasse who is all of the same as Beto but conservative...then I don't think Trump will get a chance to run as the Republican Choice for POTUS. I don't think the GOP can afford to primary him. Trump might not give two fucks about the optics of anything, but I think their party does. Other than Mitch McConnell refusing to allow the shutdown bill to reach the senate floor, in a show of unity with the president, there was enough GOP senatorial support to reopen the government weeks before it was reopened. I don't think the party wants to reveal how divided they are over their current leadership because it gives an image of even more chaos in their party... the party of the administration that can't stop catching scandals. And when you couple that with how they controlled all 3 branches, yet only really managed to get any legislating done on tax cuts - an issue that republicans had to jam through as well - and no other real republican agenda... you don't want to highlight how ineffective the republican controlled government was at governing. One line I found concerning from Trump last night was this: If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation. Yeah, it's a stupid rhyme that the weird neo-Nazi Jewish lad Steve Miller pretty obviously wrote (because he loves to Dr. Seuss things up)… but if he's saying "peace and legislation" and countering it with "war and investigation" and we know that the investigation into Trump won't just stop because he says it should in the State of the Union (see Richard Nixon begging for investigations to stop in previous State of the Unions)… does that mean he's threatening war if he doesn't get what he wants? On top of a government that is unlikely to come up with more funding legislation anytime soon. That fight that just ended isn't even over. Because the government was only reopened for 3 more weeks before they have to go and try to kick it down the road again (politicians should campaign on passing legislation to end the concept of government shutdowns by the way, they are monumentally fucking stupid and there's something like 800,000 federal workers and fuck knows how many people working as contractors for the government that would vote to know that they'll be able to predict that they'll get fucking paid). So we're going to see the same "GIVE ME MONEY FOR THE WALL OR YOU DON'T GET A GOVERNMENT" tactics being used again.
Cicero Posted February 6, 2019 Posted February 6, 2019 On 05/02/2019 at 11:33, Eco said: I don't think Trump has a chance in the next election. I'm not even sure he has the backing of the Republican Party anymore. If you get people like Beto O'Rouke, who is very likable, smart, and charismatic running for the Democrats, and a guy like Ben Sasse who is all of the same as Beto but conservative...then I don't think Trump will get a chance to run as the Republican Choice for POTUS. That would be interesting. Thought his born-alive proposal was compelling. Was inevitably blocked so it's always funny hearing the likes of Pelosi argue morality in regards to the Wall.
Carnivore Chris Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 On 05/02/2019 at 17:33, Eco said: I don't think Trump has a chance in the next election. I'm surprised he had a chance in the last one, but that's how American politics work.
Danny Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 After years of Obama I think there'll be another term for Trump, I don't think his supporters are anywhere near bored of him yet. Amazing that a man who has been so openly racist, sexist, childish and amazingly (even for a politician's standard) hypocritical can get another term, but it'll most likely be the case.
Cicero Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 22 minutes ago, Danny said: After years of Obama I think there'll be another term for Trump, I don't think his supporters are anywhere near bored of him yet. Amazing that a man who has been so openly racist, sexist, childish and amazingly (even for a politician's standard) hypocritical can get another term, but it'll most likely be the case. When the future of the democratic party says that in order to fund her policies, the banks need to 'print more money', it's understandable why Trump will get another term.
Dr. Gonzo Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 30 minutes ago, Danny said: After years of Obama I think there'll be another term for Trump, I don't think his supporters are anywhere near bored of him yet. Amazing that a man who has been so openly racist, sexist, childish and amazingly (even for a politician's standard) hypocritical can get another term, but it'll most likely be the case. You should spend more time in America if you think that's amazing, mate. I am no longer shocked by anything that should be shocking that the American right wing says or does. These are people who don't bat an eyelid when kids are gunned down at their schools but think it's a moral travesty if a woman gets an abortion or two gay people hold hands.
Cicero Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 20 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: You should spend more time in America if you think that's amazing, mate. I am no longer shocked by anything that should be shocking that the American right wing says or does. These are people who don't bat an eyelid when kids are gunned down at their schools but think it's a moral travesty if a woman gets an abortion or two gay people hold hands. You could literally twist that around and say, the far left don't bat an eyelid when infants that survive abortion are killed but think building a wall is morally objectionable. There's no winner here.
Danny Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 31 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: You should spend more time in America if you think that's amazing, mate. I am no longer shocked by anything that should be shocking that the American right wing says or does. These are people who don't bat an eyelid when kids are gunned down at their schools but think it's a moral travesty if a woman gets an abortion or two gay people hold hands. Oh I understand why, some proper nutters over there. I remember an argument i had once with an American kid at a job interview over guns, it was like headbutting an oncoming car.
Dr. Gonzo Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 2 minutes ago, Cicero said: You could literally twist that around and say, the far left don't bat an eyelid when infants that survive abortion are killed but think building a wall is morally objectionable. There's no winner here. Err... you know if you survive an abortion your chances of living a normal life are pretty fucking slim right? It's fucking cruel to let them live lives that are going to be pretty low quality for a first world country; probably more morally objectionable than not bringing them into this fucked up world with debilitating disabilities. I also don't think building a wall isn't really morally objectionable, it's just a stupid waste of money that doesn't actually address border security. I'm not morally opposed to the wall, I'm morally opposed to spending a lot of money on a project that doesn't actually do anything other than serve as a monument to racism. But there's already a fucking wall on the southern border... and most illegal immigrants aren't even coming from Mexico (they usually come in through airports and overstay their visas). Drug traffickers have already been circumventing a border wall, but hey let's spend billions on a border wall! It's not so much morally objectionable as much as it intellectually objectionable. At best it's an infantile plan that won't stop anything and at worst it's a monument to racism. I can concede that there's at least a better rationale behind calling abortions morally objectionable... but not when you look at statistics of countries before and after abortion, as well as considering that it's probably a fairly personal decision for each woman that has to face that question and everyone's got their own different reasoning. But the wall being morally objectionable? Maybe in the extent it could be a monument to racism... but if the proposed wall is objectionable in any regard it's first and foremost objectionable because of it's impracticability. You probably could twist it around to show morally ambiguous things and make that claim. But those examples you've given aren't the best ones. Another reason I have a hard time taking the American right wing very seriously is all of the religious bullshit they spout... and then they go fall in line and vote for people like Donald Trump... a man who is basically a complete juxtaposition to Jesus Christ. They have president pussygrabber, who fucks porn stars while his wife is pregnant, and then they tell us they're the party of God and family values. These people are the biggest fucking joke in American politics.
Cicero Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 5 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Err... you know if you survive an abortion your chances of living a normal life are pretty fucking slim right? It's fucking cruel to let them live lives that are going to be pretty low quality for a first world country; probably more morally objectionable than not bringing them into this fucked up world with debilitating disabilities. I also don't think building a wall isn't really morally objectionable, it's just a stupid waste of money that doesn't actually address border security. I'm not morally opposed to the wall, I'm morally opposed to spending a lot of money on a project that doesn't actually do anything other than serve as a monument to racism. But there's already a fucking wall on the southern border... and most illegal immigrants aren't even coming from Mexico (they usually come in through airports and overstay their visas). Drug traffickers have already been circumventing a border wall, but hey let's spend billions on a border wall! It's not so much morally objectionable as much as it intellectually objectionable. At best it's an infantile plan that won't stop anything and at worst it's a monument to racism. I can concede that there's at least a better rationale behind calling abortions morally objectionable... but not when you look at statistics of countries before and after abortion, as well as considering that it's probably a fairly personal decision for each woman that has to face that question and everyone's got their own different reasoning. But the wall being morally objectionable? Maybe in the extent it could be a monument to racism... but if the proposed wall is objectionable in any regard it's first and foremost objectionable because of it's impracticability. You probably could twist it around to show morally ambiguous things and make that claim. But those examples you've given aren't the best ones. Another reason I have a hard time taking the American right wing very seriously is all of the religious bullshit they spout... and then they go fall in line and vote for people like Donald Trump... a man who is basically a complete juxtaposition to Jesus Christ. They have president pussygrabber, who fucks porn stars while his wife is pregnant, and then they tell us they're the party of God and family values. These people are the biggest fucking joke in American politics. So that justifies killing them? By that logic, we should kill all people with disabilities given they are living a low quality of life? There are several cases of abortion survivors growing up to live healthy lives, and that is still aside the point. A fetus has moral value therefor has a right to live. There is nothing moral about the idea that this child might have a difficult time growing up, so we must kill him/her. In the argument of morality, I will always be devils advocate and spot inconsistencies or hypocrisies. So when you have people from the far left trying to take the moral high ground over Trump and far right conservatives, yet at the same time, reject a bill that saves fetus's who survive abortion, couldn't be any more hypocritical.
6666 Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 America is an interesting place as the states are so different from each other with their own specific state laws. On one hand they're ahead of us like marijuana being legal in certain states. On the other hand, certain states have religion majorly influencing theirs laws and not in a "love thy neighbour" sort of way... Think Idaho just voted against a bill that would've ended child marriages, apparently it's something that goes on in a few red states in America. It's basically a country made up of countries. It's what right wingers pretend the EU is...
Dr. Gonzo Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 23 minutes ago, Cicero said: So that justifies killing them? By that logic, we should kill all people with disabilities given they are living a low quality of life? There are several cases of abortion survivors growing up to live healthy lives, and that is still aside the point. A fetus has moral value therefor has a right to live. There is nothing moral about the idea that this child might have a difficult time growing up, so we must kill him/her. In the argument of morality, I will always be devils advocate and spot inconsistencies or hypocrisies. So when you have people from the far left trying to take the moral high ground over Trump and far right conservatives, yet at the same time, reject a bill that saves fetus's who survive abortion, couldn't be any more hypocritical. Is it ethical to give birth to an unwanted child? There's a lot more moral ambiguity over that than not giving a fuck about kids getting killed at their schools, imo.
Harry Posted March 4, 2019 Posted March 4, 2019 2 hours ago, Danny said: After years of Obama I think there'll be another term for Trump, I don't think his supporters are anywhere near bored of him yet. Amazing that a man who has been so openly racist, sexist, childish and amazingly (even for a politician's standard) hypocritical can get another term, but it'll most likely be the case. I think it really depends who the Democrats put up against him. They run a very real risk of going too far to the left and picking someone that will inspire their left wing base and do well in the primaries but leaving many in the middle perceiving them as way too risky for their management of the economy. It's been surprising how far left some of their mainstream candidates like Harris and Booker have gone, almost on a level with Warren and Sanders, and are promising the world just like when Obama was running. Only klobuchar seems more realistic and genuinely running in that centrist lane. Many will not find her inspirational enough but she's a solid candidate and a bit more grounded in reality I think. 1 hour ago, Cicero said: When the future of the democratic party says that in order to fund her policies, the banks need to 'print more money', it's understandable why Trump will get another term. It's a bit rich though when trump's tax cuts adds something like another 7 trillion to Americas debt over the next 10 years. Literally doubling or more their annual deficit towards levels not seen since the GFC.
Cicero Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 15 hours ago, Harry said: It's a bit rich though when trump's tax cuts adds something like another 7 trillion to Americas debt over the next 10 years. Literally doubling or more their annual deficit towards levels not seen since the GFC. As opposed to AOC and Bernie's socialist and unrealistic Green New Deal policy that would cost 93 trillion. Just need the banks to print more money is all like AOC said. Federal spending has more to do with the deficit than tax cuts.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.